Wednesday 21 January 2004 07.28 EST
First published on Wednesday 21 January 2004 07.28 EST

His role

Andrew Gilligan sparked the cataclysmic row between the government and the BBC when he reported allegations that Downing Street had ordered an intelligence dossier on Iraq weapons of mass destruction to be "sexed up".

Gilligan, the defence correspondent for BBC Radio 4's Today programme, said a "senior official in charge of compiling the dossier" had alleged the government had inserted the claim that weapons of mass destruction could be launched within 45 minutes even though it had come from just one unreliable source.

The initial report went out at 6.07am on May 29 2003, and by 7.32am Downing Street had issued a categorical denial of the allegations, saying "Not one word of the dossier was not entirely the work of the intelligence agencies."

The Today programme then broadcast a second two-way interview, in which presenter John Humphrys asked Gilligan of the dossier: "Are you suggesting, let's be very clear about this, that it was not the work of the intelligence agencies?"

This time Gilligan was much more equivocal in his reference to Tony Blair, saying his source believed the prime minister had "misunderstood" the intelligence material.

But his initial choice of words came back to haunt him. It emerged during the Hutton inquiry that the Today programme's editor, Kevin Marsh, had sent a memo in which he described Gilligan's report as "flawed" and "lacking in judgment".

Marsh's comments were echoed by the BBC's director of news, Richard Sambrook, who praised Gilligan for his newsgathering skills but described him as a "reporter who paints in primary colours" rather than the "subtleties and nuances" of news reporting.

The reporter's unconventional working practices also came under the spotlight during the inquiry. In an email sent to Gilligan to request a meeting Marsh wrote: "Since you are entirely nocturnal, while I'm a normal human being, we don't seem to meet often. Maybe you could creak the coffin lid open next week during daylight hours."

Gilligan followed up his Today programme reports with a column in the Mail on Sunday in which he gave details of his meeting with the anonymous source and, crucially, claimed the source had named Alastair Campbell as the government official responsible for the insertion of the 45-minute claim.

He described the source as "gently despairing" about the way Downing Street had exaggerated the case for war. And he quoted him saying that while conventional missiles could be launched in 45 minutes, there was no evidence for the government's claim that this applied to weapons of mass destruction.

The decision to name Mr Campbell was particularly significant because Gilligan already had a difficult relationship with the government's communications chief. The pair had clashed in November 2000 with a Today story about plans for a draft EU constitution, and on several occasions during the Iraq war, which Gilligan covered from Baghdad.

The following week, Gilligan once again used his Mail on Sunday column to detail the unfolding row with the government, describing the day "Hurricane Alastair and tropical storm Tony blew into my life". This was a reference to the government's decision to use one of its daily briefings to detail what it claimed were a series of inaccuracies in Gilligan's original report.

Two weeks later, Gilligan refused to reveal to MPs on the foreign affairs select committee the identity of his source. Government scientist David Kelly later came forward to admit he had a meeting with Gilligan, but told MPs he did not believe he could be the source quoted in Gilligan's Today programme report.

What he said: key quotes

On the claim that the government knowingly inserted false information into the dossier: "I have to say with the benefit of hindsight, looking at it now with a fine-tooth comb, I think it wasn't wrong to have said - but it wasn't perfect either," he told the inquiry.

"What this was was the product of a live broadcast. It was, I do believe, a fair assessment to draw from what he said to me but I think, on reflection, I didn't use exactly the right language."

On the BBC governors' criticism of the language used in his report: "I think in hindsight as I say, particularly that 6.07, quite unwittingly and unintentionally but I did give people the wrong impression about whether this was real intelligence or whether it was made up or not."

On 'sexing up': Lord Hutton asked Gilligan: "You put the question 'Was it to make it sexier?' and Dr Kelly replied 'Yes, to make it sexier'?" Gilligan replied: "Yes."

On naming Campbell: Lord Hutton : "Are you clear in your recollection that you asked how was it transformed and that the word Campbell was first spoken by Dr Kelly?" Gilligan: "Yes, absolutely." Lord Hutton: "It wasn't a question by you saying 'Is Campbell involved in this?' ?".Gilligan: "No, it was him. He raised the subject of 45 minutes and the subject of Campbell."

On his relationship with Campbell: "I had had a difficult relationship with Mr Campbell during the Iraq war. He complained about my coverage several times; and I thought he had a particular issue about some of my reporting. We have never met but I had reason to believe he did not like me and he did not like my reporting."

Hutton inquiry: stage one

Gave evidence on August 12 concerning his meetings with Dr Kelly. They met at the Charing Cross Hotel in central London where Gilligan paid £4.15 for a bottle of Coca-Cola and a bottle of Appletise. The inquiry heard that Gilligan made a record of the meeting on an electronic organiser. A section of his notes read: "Transformed week before publication to make it sexier. The classic was the 45 minutes. Most things in dossier were double source but that was single source ... most people in intelligence weren't happy with it because it didn't reflect the considered view they were putting forward."

The note added: "Campbell: real information but unreliable, included against our wishes. Not in original draft - dull, he asked if anything else could go in." Mr Gilligan, however, admitted that in hindsight he had "quite unwittingly and unintentionally" given the wrong impression in a 6.07am version of the May 29 Today broadcast that Dr Kelly believed the government knew the 45-minute claim was wrong.

Key exchange

Lord Hutton: May I just ask you, Mr Gilligan, looking at the first paragraph, you put the question: Was it to make it sexier? And Dr Kelly replied: Yes, to make it sexier?Andrew Gilligan:Yes, to make it sexier, yes, so he adopted my words.Lord Hutton: Now are you clear in your recollection that you asked how was it transformed, and that the name Campbell was first spoken by Dr Kelly?Andrew Gilligan: Yes, absolutely.Lord Hutton: It was not a question by you: was Campbell involved in this?Andrew Gilligan: No, it was him. He raised the subject of the 45 minutes and he raised the subject of Campbell.

Stage two

Under cross-examination on September 17 from Heather Rogers QC, counsel for the BBC, Gilligan detailed an extensive list of corrections and apologies over his May 29 report. He said it would have been better "with hindsight" to have scripted the 6.07am report so as not to have said the government inserted the 45 minute claim knowing it was wrong, and admitted he had wrongly described Dr Kelly as a member of the intelligence services. Jonathan Sumption QC, the counsel for the government, followed on from this point, asking if he had used this description knowing "people would find your report both more exciting and more credible". Gilligan denied the accusation, saying it was a "slip of the tongue", but Mr Sumption quoted evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee (FAC) where Gilligan declared "absolutely, yes" that his source was in the intelligence services.

Lord Hutton asked him what "absolutely, yes" meant in these circumstances. Gilligan said he was attempting to protect his source. James Dingemans QC, counsel to the inquiry, extracted an admission that it had been a mistake to attribute a view of his own in this case - that the 45 minute claim was "questionable" - to Dr Kelly.

Another thread to his second appearance concerned emails he sent to MPs on the FAC informing them that Dr Kelly had been Susan Watts's source. Under questioning from Ms Rogers he said he apologised and said he was not "thinking straight" at the time.

Key exchange

Mr Sumption: I think you accepted on the last occasion that you gave evidence here, and more or less accepted this morning, that that particular allegation, that the government probably knew that the 45 minutes figure was wrong, was something that you could not support?

Gilligan: It was not sufficiently supported. It did not have no support. David Kelly did not say it in terms but he did say that the statement that WMD were ready for use in 45 minutes was unreliable. He said it was wrong. He said it was included "against our wishes". And the conclusion I drew from that was that the wishes had been expressed and the wishes had been made known, which is something we do now know to be the case.

Mr Sumption: You accept, I think, that it was expressed by you as something that your source had said, whereas in fact it was an inference of your own?

Gilligan: Yes, that is right, that was my mistake.

Mr Sumption: . The same is true, is it not, of the word "ordered"; that was not something that Dr Kelly had said, it was Gilligan speaking not Kelly, was it not?

Gilligan: Yes. It was my interpretation of what he had said.

Gilligan's third appearance, on September 18, dealt with the notes on his electronic organiser of his meeting with Dr Kelly. A computer expert said there were anomalies in the two sets of notes on the organiser: Four could be explained by technical factors but a fifth caused him concern, that only the second made mention of Mr Campbell.

Gilligan denied doctoring his notes and said he had typed as Dr Kelly spoke, saved that version, and then went over the quotes with Dr Kelly and added further information (including the Campbell reference) as he asked more questions. Gilligan agreed to a further examination of the back up files on his laptop computer.

Where he stands now

Gilligan has had to give up his Mail on Sunday column, and has not returned to work on the Today programme since he appeared before the foreign affairs select committee last June.

But he continues to be employed by the BBC and last autumn he returned to work in a new role making documentaries for Radio 5 Live, on the same salary and entitlements he enjoyed on the Today programme. It has not yet been decided whether the move will be permanent.

Over the Christmas holiday a senior executive at the BBC admitted heads could roll because of the Hutton report, however Gilligan has the broad backing of those at the very top of the BBC and could survive the Hutton report.

The corporation's director general, Greg Dyke, is adamant the broad thrust of Gilligan's report was correct and has sanctioned a media strategy that will involve the corporation going on the offensive should its journalism come in for what he judges to be unfair criticism in the report.

The reporter, whom friends have described as "shattered" by the turn of events, has kept his head down since the row broke and has angrily denied speculation that he is planning to publish an account of his role in the affair.

Friends say Gilligan believes the affair has "dominated his life for too long" and writing a book "would just mean he has to think about the business every day for another six months, something he is loathe to do".

Instead, he is keen to return to work as a reporter and is hoping he can survive the storm when Lord Hutton's report is published.